Ikarus, you’re on my ballot.
FWIW you’ll have my vote too.
I thought you were waging a one-man war against SiCO. Now you are voting for them?
He mainly had an issue with ICANP and their leader Sabus and once we finally manage to fix that problem we have been good
o7 A vote for Ikarus!
The campaign was (and continues to be) against Sabus Narian and all the crap he does.
I will go after anyone that cooperates with Sabus in any way for the rest of his EvE life. That included SICO when ICANP was part of the alliance, but not anymore since ICANP was expelled, as I’ve stated multiple times. In particular, I stated it in the first post and in the very title of the thread that shows the demise of ICANP:
I would go after SICO even after they expelled ICANP if I had observed in SICO leadership the crap that made me decide to go after Sabus and ICANP, but I haven’t seen any of that at the leadership level there, so I have nothing against them. I may (and have) target(ed) specific SICO members that I consider toxic, but not SICO as a whole anymore.
I do make a special case of SICO in my anti-ganking activities, though, in that I’m careful to not interfere with anyone ganking them either, but that’s because they’re too big and cannot be wardec’ed, not because I have anything against them. Suicide ganking is the only real threat they have to deal with, and being that big it’s up to them to figure how to deal with that if they want to.
Finally, and more to the point of this thread, regardless of what I may think of SICO and whether I might end up changing my mind and targeting them again in the future for some reason, I do think that, unlike other high sec candidates I’ve seen in the past, @Ikarus_Cesaille is a good contribution to the CSM and that him being there would be beneficial to the game, and that’s the only thing that should matter in deciding whether to vote for him or not.
Impressive post and campaign page, clearly you have put a lot of time and effort into this candidacy.
Since Steve Ronuken isn’t running thins year, there is need for a new candidate that understands the needs of the many third party programmers that enable the vibrant ecosystem of out-of-game tools the community uses. Reading through your campaign, you clearly have some experience in that area. Will you advocate the importance of maintaining the health of tools like ESI, SSO and the image server / IEC that enable the existence of these tools?
Hey Ikarus - Nice CSM campaign page! Lots of great content on there with some lofty goals to elevate the player experience. I really like your idea for player corporation missions. I’ve always wished there was a mechanism for things like corp-sponsored large scale industrial projects (like citadels or caps). Some way to breakdown those projects into smaller milestones, maybe some sort of task hierarchy; Need x Trit, or X Cap components, etc. (other than with buy orders, as they offer no visibility of what the resources are even used for). I feel like it would add depth for entry-level industrial tasks and allow collaboration of corp members (particularly engaging new/industrial players) towards the large corporation goals.
Anyways, you’ve got my vote! Best of luck in the election!
Your experience in Eve (under Ikarus Cesaille) appears to be overwhelmingly in high-security space, and you have emerged as the leader of the largest high-sec alliance. Most of your primary campaign points focus on corporation management, new player experiences in high-sec, and tertiary functions that the majority of players don’t really interact with. How will you appeal to the thousands of voters who are not new to Eve and who do not interact with community management mechanisms etc. to demonstrate that you have their interests in mind?
In short: Why should a null-sec bitter vet vote for you?
I thought all the null sec guys were told who to vote for…
not every person on the csm has to have the heart of nullsec in mind… you got your own people running to be on CSM. it needs to be diverse with players from null/low/high/wh not just null and maybe high.
Why should we vote for you if you cant even defend one system in high sec from 5 people?
Yes absolutely. I do not believe that the ingame mechanisms will ever be great enough to replace the tools created by the users and i do not even feel like there is any need to this. ESI is an great extension for EVE that allows the community to “mod” the game for their needs and extend eve from the ingame stuff also to our daily life (want it or not). IT technician will remain as a career option on my list right besides mission running and pvp.
Thank you for your support! I feel like that the corporation mechanisms should be more than just a framework and an extra corp chat tab on your chat window pile. Having content drivers inside the corporate mechanisms that would push people towards doing things together and interacting more with their corporation members.
Yes players do create their own content and push it down to their members but if the corporation mechanisms doesn’t bring much value to the game it simply adds more mess to it in the first place.
I have never claimed to be an great FC or someone who would have interest in holding systems. My whole focus in eve is to connect content with the players who like that type of content. Im pretty good at setting up training programs and making member flow fluent in and out from the corporations but when you put me in a pvp ship i just cry and die.
My approach on the whole CSM position comes more from a management side than actually playing the game. I want that those players who want to interact with certain type of content have the tools to do so as effective as possible and that new players are able to find their way into that type of content as well. Currently i fear that corporations way too often tell their members what they should do instead of the members deciding themselves what they want to do. Specially when a members focus starts to change towards something else than it was in the past.
I always try to start tackling problems from the core and progress outwards. Instead of looking for the issues i look for the cause of those issues. This puts me in a place where i look at the problems on the meta level and adapt to changes by creating different solutions. It is then other people who take it from here and apply the things on the micro level.
So why you should vote for me even when we can’t “hold” systems in high sec is that when we can’t hold a system it means that someone else is able to push people out. And when they are able to do so they are enjoying the content they want to enjoy. Now my job will be to teach players on my end why you are doing that, what you are doing and most important how can they get into that type of content themselves if it is something they love doing.
A lot of my goals is then set so that it would be easier for new players to join new type of content and that it would be easier for you to keep on rewarding and guiding those players in your corporation with your type of content.
This is the hardest part in my whole campaign and by far the greatest challenge. As i have decided to take a more theoretical approach on fixing on the issue it means indeed that the end user won’t get shiny new toys in their hands. Even when my approach is slightly more towards helping new players to find their place in eve it does not mean that the old players would not be struggling with the same problems. They are just simply so used to the systems that they might not even notice the issues.
For this reason i have created practical examples of systems that in my mind would fix up these issues and give an practical example for the end user what changing the system on the upper level would look like for the end user which are the line members in this case. Now a lot of these ideas would require great corporation mechanisms overhauls which is a long shot but it gives you some ideas what i am after.
The things i am mainly focusing on is that you would be able to get enough meaningful information from the ingame client that will allow you to make your decisions or spike your interest to research more on external sites such as reddit or the eve forums. This would be a greater benefit for new players who are not familiar with using third party sites when they are trying to find a corporation for themselves but also a way for older people to check if what each corporation promises is indicated in their data shown.
My idea on this issue was to apply the personal activity tracker on corporation level and allow corporations to choose to become sort of “ranked” corporations. Like in real life established corporations will need to give out some numbers to prove the statements that the corporation claims to be doing. This would also make it possible for corporations to compete on something else besides zkillboard stats as pvp is not the only activity players in eve are looking for, specially a lot of the new players.
Secondly i would like a corporation to be more than just a shallow framework. Currently belonging to a corporation simply sets your blue but the corporation mechanisms itself doesn’t bring anything to the table. All content, systems and programs are all player driven. Well you have some corporation hangars but even using those is hard since the permission system for corporations is very limited.
I would like the corporations themselves to provide content drivers. These content drivers would be mainly similar what you can find in other MMO games where you are able to gather points from your activities in your corp to show the other members what you have done. For this i come up with an example of corporation missions, internal corporation standings and ranks. While things like this do not make you any money if there would be mechanisms inside the corporation that would support group activities together besides the player created group activities it could make the corporations more solid as well as help to guide the members towards the type of content they want to focus on general.
And things like these are not just limited to high sec but apply on universal level. No matter where you currently are the corporate mechanism is pretty much the same.
The more realistic goal that doesn’t involve complete overhauls of the current mechanisms focus more on the QOL issues that there are tons in corporation management. As i have been recruiting new guys pretty much since i was a new guy myself i constantly get asked the same questions and see where the choke points for joining and finding corporations are. However these QOL fixes are not something that suddenly would change your gameplay but over all improve the value that the corporation and community management processed will provide to the end user. SO by combining this fact with the ideas i have created i hope that im able to paint a better picture for people who like to keep on playing the game with other players.
So to add to the previous the bottom line is that content in EVE is always almost player created. I simply want to give better tools for those who work hard to provide the content for you so that your experience in the area you want to focus on will be as fruitful as possible. This can be done by great overhauls but also greatly improved by some targeted changes in different areas of the game and specially into NPE.
I would like to know your stance on making false reports about players to CCP because someone does not like someone else’s style of gameplay. Screen shot from your coalition channel in game in case you are curious as to where this came from. https://prnt.sc/sl94jq Member is part of Silent Company for anyone who may find this relevant.
Torgo brings up a cromulent point; how can anyone trust you’d make a good member of the CSM when the members of your own alliance are so ill informed of EVE’s TOS? Shouldn’t you focus on teaching the 20’000 sticks of dead wood in your alliance how to play the game before you try to tell everyone else how to?
This is hilarious. As if you have any chance of winning. Yours is a shock-and-awe campaign against reality.
See you in Ronne.